Here the real ones are - Equality simply means that one thing is equal to another. This is in terms of measurement. 5=5, 2=2, etc. However, because men are not women, they are not equal. The faulty presumption lies in the belief that if one thing is not equal to another, it is somehow inferior or superior. 5 is not superior to 4, and 4 is not inferior to 5. Something about our tendency to preserve our egos coerces us into believing that we are better or worse than others, which leads us into thinking that we ought to change ourselves or each other.

This is the pitfall of both feminist and anti-feminist movements - that women ought to be something other than what they are.

No. This is the pitfalls of systematic socialization when it comes to gender roles.

Equality is promoted by certain feminists exactly because it is a reactionary socio-political movement that is rising out of a milieu where inequality equals power dynamics (better/worse).

Your argument would make sense if we're talking of an Utopian society, but, no society has ever existed, or are existing currently that does not have some kind of social heirarchy to curb power dynamics from getting out of control.

Thus, in the real world (leaving the realm of mathematics), 1 is considered better than 2 - such that we call the first one a WINNER.

I can only sympathize. If I were to encourage women to do anything, I would encourage them to pursue their personal goals and for others not to hold them back unless they were planning to divide and conquer.

But, you'd first have to acknowledge how others could/do hold them back. Your previous argument thus negates this sentiment.

No. This is the pitfalls of systematic socialization when it comes to gender roles.

Equality is promoted by certain feminists exactly because it is a reactionary socio-political movement that is rising out of a milieu where inequality equals power dynamics (better/worse).

Your argument would make sense if we're talking of an Utopian society, but, no society has ever existed, or are existing currently that does not have some kind of social heirarchy to curb power dynamics from getting out of control.

Thus, in the real world (leaving the realm of mathematics), 1 is considered better than 2 - such that we call the first one a WINNER.

But, you'd first have to acknowledge how others could/do hold them back. Your previous argument thus negates this sentiment.

I'm not talking about a Utopian society.

Here's the misunderstanding - When you refer to equality, you are talking about the promotion of equal opportunity rights in a social sense.

The problem is that statistical measurements only apply to large pools of people and not to individuals. There are plenty of women who would fill a "man's shoes" in areas of expertise where other men might fail miserably at. There are also men who bleed into filling rolls that women are stereotyped as being astute at, like teaching or linguistics. Men are, on average, more spatially perceptive while women are more verbal. However, these differences are so marginal that thinking that one sex should bow to the other is ludicrous.

Enforcing dominion over someone because they have better hand-eye coordination than you do is kind of a silly political struggle.

I think most of the idea of feminism is ridiculous.
Feminism is not about equality, something that I actually like.
Feminists try to gain all the perks of being a man, while not taking on any of the responsibilities and downsides with it.

It's just a matter of chemistry and biology.
Estrogen makes you act female, testosterone makes you act like men.
High levels of estrogen turns people into emotional bundles that cry for nothing.
High levels of testosterone makes people aggressive as hell and usually physically strong.
Those two are extremes, but that's where women and men are different.
Men are naturally stronger and more aggressive because they are, were and always will be built to protect the women and the children of the group.

I can admit that I am teasing you a bit, but it's only seriousness packaged like a joke.
Why? I can't take feminism seriously.
I've even done college studies on the subject. Mandatory stuff...
Really tried to take it all in and give it a shot, but the entire mindset just pisses me off.

I'll buy equality, but we are different.
And, you know, reality is that you will only have as much power as men permit.
I feel dirty saying that, but if you look at it in the light of realism, it is true.
Men have always taken over because we are generally speaking stronger, meaner and more aggressive.
Humans have always been on edge with each other or other threats, predators etc.
This has never ceased to be the case.
How many times when you walk home in the dark of night haven't you wished that you had a big sturdy guy with you?
That's another point where men and women are different.
Another point on why we need each other, or rather to remind you why you need us.
We always know why you are needed.
Don't take that wrong, either, i'm the most pussy-whipped guy out there when i'm in a relationship.
All voluntarily. I even enjoy doing the cooking, cleaning, dishes, laundry etc at a regular basis.

We need you because you think differently, feel differently.
You enable us to feel things that most of us don't, normally.
Us together can produce children for the continued survival of our kind.
We're usually good at different things, and none of those qualities should be looked down upon.
Women and men are meant to complement each other, not to be alike.
Regardless if you are a man or a woman, you deserve your liberty, your free right to express yourself, your opinions and your right to do what you want as long as you are able and it won't hurt others.

I realize some are going to dislike this a lot.
On the other hand, I think most people with common sense would agree.
I'm just ballsy enough to stand up and challenge this bullshit. It's gone too far.

Mightier than the tread of marching armies is the power of an idea whose time has come